i’ve asked a question for this before but after a long conversation, my question
wasn’t answered: is there anyway to navigate through patterns (from pattern 1 to 2 etc)
without affecting the pattern sequence?
Some users said that navigating with Ctrl+arrows doesn’t affect pattern sequence!
But in my Renoise (1.8.b5+b6) it does!
Also, the F9-12 keys for jumping to rows 0-16-32-48, don’t work at all.
No, but you can navigate through the arranger only on one way, the other key-combo changes pattern sequences.
Yes there have been more requests to be able to browse pattern numbers without affecting the order-list.
The few reasons why i could understand thie need is, if some patterns have not been included in the sequencer list (test or temporary patterns or patterns that you don’t know to give a place yet.)
I know my english are not that good but i’m trying hard to describe
what i want to say and i think most of the times it’s quite understandable.
No, that’s not what i meant. In my first post it’s clear that i’m talking about pattern navigation and nothing more. Quoting my first post:
Everytime i have a question, people answer to things irrelevant. And when they finally understand what i’m trying to say (perhaps because of my bad english), they seem to try to show me that what i’m asking for is wrong. I don’t understand why.
Renoise is a commercial product. Which means that people pay to get this product. As a serious commercial product (and a serious software company), it should accept creative and productive criticism. Big companies, like Adobe, does this. It listens to its customers in order to improve the software and please the existing ones (so they buy updates) and earn new ones. If we are here to compliment each other or the programmers like “whooaoo, Renoise is perfect” etc, then i got it all wrong. That’s not me. If you don’t like the things i say or the way i’m saying them, ban me. I don’t think i offended someone and if i did (by mistake), it wasn’t in my intentions.
Renoise is an excellent piece of software. I believe Renoise is what trackers should be like today. But, i think there’s much room for improvements. And all i’m trying to do is to contribute any way i can with my comments and suggestions. I’m a customer who paid for this product and also a musician who makes music with trackers (and not only) for more than 15 years. That’s why i believe i have the right to make some suggestions.
We just did not understand what your request was.
But now we do (at least I do).
You want to be able to browse/access/navigate to patterns without changing anything within the sequencer. So even if for instance pattern 2 is not listed in the sequencer you should be able to access this pattern without touching the sequencer at all.
Personally I can see many ways of doing this in the future.
I would like a better list of every element in Renoise. So then you could also see a list of all patterns in your project. Then accessing them directly without adding them to the sequencer would also be useful. You then also drag/drop them from this list to sequencer etc.
This gives you a much better overview of your patterns in the project.
This also fits the idea with instrument-patterns etc.
Ok then. Out of curiosity, maybe you can explain to me/us exactly how this feature would be useful to you when writing songs? Maybe you could describe a situation where needing this features is very obvious and clear? It is like Vvoois said - you need to use patterns without disturbing the pattern order, to use them as temporary storage or to create certain blocks of notes, etc., and then bring that data back into the “real” patterns? Something like that?
Just trying to get a better understanding of how this feature could benefit the Renoise experience. Thinking about it I can already imagine some situations where it would be useful, but it’s always nice to hear both sides of the story.
PS. The Renoise devs do listen to suggestions given here on the forum and stuff. As far as I know there are lots of features in Renoise which started life as user suggestions. Not every feature will make it into the final program of couse, but if it’s useful for many people then it will probably appear in some future version, which is why it’s important to clearly describe these things and what kind of situations they might be useful for.
Three different users found a series of examples and possible usages of my suggestion (in another thread about “Pattern Manager/Map”). So why, at first, everybody seemed to think that my question/suggestion is strange?
Exactly the same thing, happened with another question/suggestion i’ve made in a previous thread about the “Delete Selection” function in the pattern editor. In the beginning, some people tried to show me that this is irrational and would be useless. Finally, many users agreed that a function like this would be helpful.
I can see the use of this.
But for me its not that I arrange patterns that much.
But as Renoise will become more ‘advanced’ in the future where you will see new elements that are bigger then notes and smaller then patterns, I think a list of elements in your project would be just great. There is not much use of arranging single notes, but if we start talk about clips (can contain anything from a single note to a ‘endless’ many notes). And we also think about ‘breaking up’ and expand the RNI format, and ppl probably already now start record larger audioclips, then some sort of listing is necessary IMO.
This has been discussed before, also internally among the renoise team.
Here is a part of a mock-up that was made and discussed a bit:
I think your request for accessing patterns would fit nicely in this as well.
Dud… as I said. People did just not understand what you asked for. So lets leave it with that, ok?
About deleting, as said in that thread, its just another suggestion from you. There are like 500 other requests for improvements. And if three ppl agrees with you, there might be 300 that don’t etc… I would not mind having that option. But personally I would never replaced the current deleting with your suggestion. So just chill when you get some opinions against you.
I never expected everyone to agree with my suggestions (and this doesn’t bother me at all), neither i expect the whole development team to work on my suggestions only and nothing else. What bothers me is (as Bantai mentioned) people show a “little more protectionism than is healthy” and that many gave directions on how to do things that were irrelevant to those i mentioned.
It depends, i usually see people trying to figure out what you really want and they pick an assumption and base a judgement on that assumption.
It is a good start of misunderstanding i agree with that, but people don’t agree in the end, what they disapproved in the beginning because they understood your question exactly the same way on both moments
Some suggestions you did (like the delete selection) cut in known workflow, if you work a long time with Renoise (and trackers that behave the same in this aspect) and do a suggestion that changes a thing that had been so for a very long time, you can count on disapproval of many users.
This may be a commercial program but has been put together more democratically over time, lots of features are implemented because of users that voted for options or requested them, if they really fit a certain logic they will be implemented, as long is it is easy enough to do it within a few minutes suggestions get even done during beta period. The heavier changes go to the next major release.
And if it can’t be done there is a good reason for that… it either requires too many changes that can easily break a lot of working features or just requires a lot of weeks work that ain’t worth the trouble for such a small feature suggestion.
Most reactions are pure from users, if you want to know it for sure, put up a poll with options and let them vote for your idea, this ofcourse requires a thorough explanation of what you exactly have in mind else someone might vote nay while when they get the picture better eventually they might have voted yay instead.
I hate to ressurect what looks like a dead thread, but I’d like to have some input since I’m buying Renoise and this is an important issue to me.
I’ve been doing tracker mods since 93, and I’ve used Star Trekker, Med (Amiga & PC), MadTracker, and a few other assorted flavors. Indeed, I believe all of the tracker editors that preceded Renoise had the feature of browsing patterns without disrupting play sequence, and as far as I can recall, every other editor I’ve used (Fruity Loops, Orion, Reason, Rebirth, etc) all posess this same trait. So I’m confused as to why Renoise, which is clearly a thought-out and well-developed product, would remove such a key feature unless it was critical to the design of the application.
To answer your question though…
Let’s say you have a song composed of 30 patterns. Over time, the final mix results in a pattern sequence of 120 instances, which are not necessarily in sequential order from 0 to 29. Now, you want to edit pattern 13 which is only played once, and it’s buried somewhere in that 120-instance list. So you have 2 choices, neither of which are pleasant. Either you hunt the pattern down in the sequencer list, or you disrupt the integrity of your sequence to go right to the pattern, having to remember to change it back when you’re done. It’s not consistent with the other time-saving elements of the app, but I can see that the way the pattern editor and sequencer are integrated is the reason this ‘feature’ exists.
It is, however, very annoying to work around and it took me awhile to figure out that Renoise wasn’t changing my sequence when I turned my back. I’d pay twice the asking price for Renoise just to have my pattern browsing back.
A good way to fix this would be to have a pattern ‘bank’ kind of thing where you can select and open patterns (even ones that are not in the sequence). Then, the patterns could be arranged in the sequencer.
Or, there could be a drop down box somewhere near the top of the application where you can select a pattern and edit it (again, ones that are not in the sequence are included). The sequence editor’s job is to put the sequence together, not to select patterns.
I have the demo running on a PC, a PPC Mac, and an Intel Mac. On the PC, CTRL Right/Left increases or decreases the current pattern number in the sequencer. CTRL Up/Down moves to the previous/next pattern IN THE SEQUENCER, not the total pattern list. On the Mac, the CTRL key is replaced by the Apple key, but other than that it behaves exactly the same.
Also, if you look at the available key bindings in Preferences>Keys>Pattern Editor>Navigation you should see that there is no shortcut option for “Move to Next/Previous Pattern.” The only other shortcuts I’ve found in the Keys preferences that refer to pattern navigation specify either increasing/decreasing the pattern number in the sequencer or moving to the previous/next pattern in the sequencer. Again, not what we’re looking for.